St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1887-05-05
THE RIOTOUS COMMONS.
Continuation of the Unseemly Wrangle in
the Lower House of the British
Parliament.
An Evident Intention on the Part of the
Government to Bntrap the
Parnellites,
Who Decline to swallow the Bait
Dansled Right Under Their
Noses.
The Conditions on Which Dillon VIII
Take Issue With the London
Times.

LONDON, May 4.-1ne NJ. non. w. H.
Smith, first lord of the treasury, announced
in the house of commons this afternoon
that the government had resolved that the
allegation that the statement by the Lon
don Times that Mr.. Dillon told falsehood
while denying in the house OF commons
that papers utteranceS concerning his al
legged relations with Sheridan the Inyinci-
bic, was a breach OF privilege, was not suS-
tanned by precedent.
Continuing, Mr.. Smith said it would be
against the dignity of the house to summon
the Times to the bar without previously in
quiring into the circumstances. The gem
tlemen below the gangway, Mr.. Smith
added, asked that a select committee be
constituted TO inquire forthwith into the
allegations of the Times. The practice of
the house had been to divest itself as far as
possible of judicial duty. The government
thought such committee as was asked for
would be untitled to consider such grave
questions as would have to be referred to it
for decision. The government feeling it to
be their duty to endeavor to solve the queS
ton, had instructed the attorney general
and such others as he cared to associate
with him to prosecute the Times for the
libel on Mr. Dillon, who was at liberty to
select such counsel as he saw fit. In con-
clusion Mr.. Smith urged the house to ac-
cept the course proposed.
T. p. O'Connor condemned the govern
ment's proposal. He produced copy of
the Times containing the libel on Mr..
Dillon, and, tlOuriShing it aloft said
l purchased this copy of the Times at one
of the book stalls owned by the right honor
able first lord of the treasury. II is he,speak-
ing for the government, who says no breach
OF privilege was committed. Irish cheers.
He is, therefore, deeply interested as party
in the case against the editor of the Times.
The two men ought to be in the dock to-
gether. The Irish members reject his pro-
posal as unfai1, unjust and unprecedented.
The house Of commons ought not to be taken
in by collusive action.
Here Edwin p. Delisle. Conservative
member for e-LeiceStershire. rose to
a point of order. He said he had heard
Charles Dean Tanner, home rule member
for Middle Cork, say:
The Conservatives were a damned lot of
cads.
(Voices-So are you.)
Speaker Peel-The clerk of the house will
please see that the words are taken down.
Mr.. Tanner denied that he had used the
word damned" He repeated. however,
that the Conservatives were
A LOT OF CADs.
The speaker said he must withdraw the
explanation and apologize. Mr.. Tanner
said he would do so. Sir William Vernon
Harcourt denounced the governments
proposal. Sir William Clark, solicitor
general, moved an amendment to the gov
ernment's proposal to the effect that the
house did not consider the Times state
ments concerning Mr.. Dillon breach of
privilege. Justifying his action in offering
the amendment, he declared that there was
no record of parliament having committed
man to custody for breach of privilege
such as the action of the Times was now
alleged to be. He added that he, and not
the attorney general, was responsible for the
advice on which the government has acted.
He proposed to confine himself to the legal
points of the case, regardless of party poll
tics. He then quoted presidents to show
that the house was not the proper tribunal
to deal with such matters, no corruption
having been alleged of member, nor had
any contempt of the house been exhibited,
such as had constituted the offense in pre-
vious cases where breach of privilege had
been committed. The course of the prose-
cution. the solicitor general said, would be
left to such persons as the Irish members
might nominate, both council and solicitors.
If the government was asked to appoint
them they would interpose no objection.
In conclusion he slightly modified his
amendment, making it read that the house
declines to treat the Times publication as a
breach of privilege.
SIR CHARLES RUSSELL.
Liberal. contended that Dillon's conduct in
the house had been attacked, and that fact
constituted breach of privilege. 1t was
the duty of the house, primarily incumbent
on the government leader of the house
(Smith), to take action to protect the honor
of its members. The course pro-
posed by the governments motion
was an evasion of his duty. The
question was not so much whether
a committee should be appointed as to
whether the house intended to pass by the
imputation against Dillon and say before
the world that fragrant as the offense was.
it was not OF such character as constituted
a breach of privilege. Lord Randolph
Churchill admitted that the case presented
prima facie breach Of privilege, but he
thought the house was not refusing judi
cial inquiry. The only difference was
az to the form of inquiry
to be adopted. He regarded a resort to the
ordinary tribunals of law as one that would
afford far better remedy than could be OBJ
tanned from action by the house. He de-
precated the attack made by O'Connor on
the government leader in the house. No
one outside of O'Connors own circle
could be expected to sympathZe with
him in SUCH an assault. 1t was utterly
unjustifiable. From the very language
used. Smith could we'll afford to ignore the
assault. Cheers. If the government
leader in the house was charged with not
taking primary action for breach of privi-
eye committed against one of its mem-
bers,
he COULD REToRT
that it was the leader of the opposition who
ought to have been expected to protect his
friends, having taken the lead outside the
house in agitation for the repeal of the
union. Cheers.
Gladstone emphatically repudiate the
assertion of his lOrdship.
Lord Randolph responded: SIT is
true, however," He then proceeded
to argue that it would be unwise
for the house to go beyond the action the
government had proposed. The action of
the house if the Times publishers should
be brought before the bar would in no-wise
curb or control the great power welded by
the press of the country.
Mr.. Storey Radical and newspaper pro-
prietor: You can try to suppress the press
of Ireland. Pamellte cheers.
Lord Randolph Churchill-Iow would a
committee of inquiry be constituted? Would
it be proposed that a member of the Ma
tonal league be put upon it? [Cries OF
'Certainly."l
in the whole history of jury packing like
it. Cheers. Besides the powers of
the committee would not be equal to
those of a court of law. The
committee indeed would be hopelessly in
cOmpetent to settle such a question of law